9769 HISTORY MARK SCHEME for the May/June 2011 question paper

advertisement
w
w
ap
eP
m
e
tr
.X
w
UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS
s
er
om
.c
Pre-U Certificate
MARK SCHEME for the May/June 2011 question paper
for the guidance of teachers
9769 HISTORY
9769/03
Paper 3 (US History Outlines, c. 1750–2000),
maximum raw mark 90
This mark scheme is published as an aid to teachers and candidates, to indicate the requirements of
the examination. It shows the basis on which Examiners were instructed to award marks. It does not
indicate the details of the discussions that took place at an Examiners’ meeting before marking began,
which would have considered the acceptability of alternative answers.
Mark schemes must be read in conjunction with the question papers and the report on the
examination.
• Cambridge will not enter into discussions or correspondence in connection with these mark schemes.
Cambridge is publishing the mark schemes for the May/June 2011 question papers for most IGCSE,
Pre-U, GCE Advanced Level and Advanced Subsidiary Level syllabuses and some Ordinary Level
syllabuses.
Page 2
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
These banding definitions address Assessment Objectives 1, 2 and 4, and should be used in
conjunction with the indicative content mark schemes for each question.
Introduction
(a) The banding definitions which follow reflect, and must be interpreted within the context of, the
following general statement:
Examiners should give their highest marks to candidates who show a ready understanding of the
relevant material and a disciplined management of the discussion the question provokes. They
should be impressed more by critical judgement, careful discrimination and imaginative handling
than by a weight of facts. Credit should be given for evidence of a good historical intelligence
and for good use of perhaps unremarkable material rather than for a stereotyped rehearsal of
memorised information.
(b) Examiners should use these banding definitions in combination with the paper-specific mark
schemes.
(c) It should go without saying that any explanation or judgement is strengthened if informed by the
use of source material.
(d) Examiners are also asked to bear in mind, when reading the following, that analysis sufficient for
a mark in the highest band may perfectly legitimately be deployed within a chronological
framework. Candidates who eschew an explicitly analytical response may well yet be able, by
virtue of the very intelligence and pointedness of their selection of elements for a well-sustained
and well-grounded account, to provide sufficient implicit analysis to justify a Band 2 mark.
(e) The Band in which an essay is placed depends on a range of criteria. As a result, not all essays
fall obviously into one particular Band. In such cases a ‘best-fit’ approach should be adopted with
any doubt erring on the side of generosity.
(f) In marking an essay, examiners should first place it in a Band and then fine-tune the mark in
terms of how strongly/weakly the demands of the Band have been demonstrated.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 3
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
Band 1: 25–30
The answer will be sharply analytical in approach and strongly argued. It will show that the demands
of the question have been fully understood and that a conscious and sustained attempt has been
made to respond to them in appropriate range and depth. It will be coherent and structured with a
clear sense of direction. The focus will be sharp and persistent. Some lack of balance, in that certain
aspects are covered less fully or certain arguments deployed less strongly than others, need not
preclude a mark in this Band. The material will be wide-ranging and handled with the utmost
confidence and a high degree of maturity. Historical explanations will be invariably clear, sharp and
well developed and historical concepts fully understood. Where appropriate there will be conscious
and successful attempts to engage with the historiography, to evaluate source material critically and
to demonstrate an awareness of competing interpretations. Use of English will be clear and fluent
with excellent vocabulary and virtually error-free.
Band 2: 19–24
The answer will be characterised by an analytical and argued approach, although there may be the
occasional passage which does not go beyond description or narrative. It will show that the demands
of the question have been very well understood and that a determined attempt has been made to
respond to them in appropriate range and depth. The essay will be coherent and clearly structured
and its judgements will be effectively supported by accurate and relevant material. Some lack of
rigour in the argument and occasional blurred focus may be allowed. Where appropriate there will be
a conscious and largely successful attempt to engage with the historiography, to evaluate source
material and to demonstrate an awareness of competing interpretations. The material will be wideranging, fully understood, confidently deployed and well controlled with high standards of accuracy.
Historical explanations will be clear and well developed and there will be a sound understanding of
historical concepts and vocabulary. Use of English will be highly competent, clear, generally fluent
and largely error-free.
Band 3: 13–18
The answer will attempt an analytical approach, although there will be passages which do not go
beyond description or narrative. It will show that the demands of the question have been understood,
at least in large part, and that a conscious attempt has been made to respond to them. There will be
an effective focus on the terms of the question and, although in places this may break down,
standards of relevance will be generally high. Although it may not be sustained throughout the
answer, or always fully supported, there will be a recognisable sense of argument. The material will
be clearly understood, with a good range, and organisation will be sound. There will be a conscious
attempt to draw conclusions and form judgements and these will be adequately supported. Some
understanding of differing and competing interpretations is to be expected and some evaluation of
sources may be attempted but probably not in a very sophisticated form. Historical explanations and
the use of historical concepts and vocabulary will be generally sound but some lack of understanding
is to be expected. Use of English will be competent, clear and largely free of serious errors.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 4
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
Band 4: 7–12
The answer may contain some analysis but descriptive or narrative material will predominate. The
essay will show that the demands of the question have been understood, at least in good part, and
that some attempt has been made to respond to them. It will be generally coherent with a fair sense
of organisation. Focus on the exact terms of the question is likely to be uneven and there will be a
measure of irrelevance. There will be some inaccuracies in knowledge, and the range may well be
limited with some gaps. Understanding of the material will be generally sound, although there will be
some lack of tautness and precision. Explanations will be generally clear although not always
convincing or well developed. Some attempt at argument is to be expected but it will lack sufficient
support in places and sense of direction may not always be clear. There may be some awareness of
differing interpretations and some attempt at evaluating source material but this is not generally to be
expected at this level and such skills, where deployed, will be unsophisticated. Some errors of
English will be present but written style should be clear although lacking in real fluency.
Band 5: 0–6
The answers will respond in some measure to the demands of the question but will be very limited in
meeting these. Analysis, if it appears at all, will be brief and undeveloped. If an argument is
attempted it will be lacking in real coherence, sense of direction, support and rigour. Focus on the
exact terms of the question is likely to be very uneven; unsupported generalisations, vagueness and
irrelevance are all likely to be on show. Historical knowledge, concepts and vocabulary will be
insufficiently understood and there will be inaccuracies. Explanations may be attempted but will be
halting and unclear. Where judgements are made they will be largely unsubstantiated whilst
investigation of historical problems will be very elementary. Awareness of differing interpretations and
the evaluation of sources is not to be expected. The answer may well be fragmentary, slight and
even unfinished. Significant errors of spelling, grammar, punctuation and syntax may well hamper a
proper understanding of the script.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 5
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
Section 1: c. 1750–c. 1820
1
To what extent was Britain to blame for the deteriorating relationship with its American
colonies between 1763 and 1776?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required. The deterioration in
relations hinged on issues such as taxation, commercial interests and politics. On taxation it
could be argued Britain was to blame for introducing taxes that were unpopular, for example, the
Sugar Tax of 1764, the Stamp Duty of 1765 and the Townsend Duties. However, in defence of
Britain these taxes were appropriate as a way of paying for the wars against France, the defeat of
whom benefitted the colonies. Further, the reaction of the colonies to the taxes was unnecessarily
violent (activities of the Sons of Liberty and the Boston Tea Party) which of necessity obliged the
British to enforce the law and in doing so inflame the situation further. It could be argued that the
Proclamation Act, 1763, and the customs controls frustrated American ambitions. On the other
hand, measures introduced by the British to control trade had been in place prior to 1763, with
limited objection, in part because the colonists benefitted from the protection of the British navy.
As with the American reaction to taxation it could be argued that the reaction of the latter was
extreme, for example, the burning of the Gaspee. Britain could be blamed for failing to recognise
the political aspirations of the Americans. The end of ‘salutory neglect’ and the introduction of
troops and the associated heavy-handed use of power, for example, with the Boston Massacre
and the punitive measures adopted against Massachusetts and Boston could be used to charge
Britain with responsibility. However, the military acted with restraint (soldiers involved in the
Boston Massacre were acquitted) and peace overtures to political activists – North’s Olive Branch
Resolution – were rejected. Further, the creation of a militia (the Minute Men) stoked tension
which led to the clash at Lexington, the event that sparked the start of the war.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, enabling
them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the
relevant and relative factors and approaches and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where
appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of
differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Candidates may choose to identify
issues as above and discuss the merits of each or present a case against the British and then
counter it with an argument for American blame. The more astute will recognise the chain of
action/reaction and the difficulty of assigning blame. Further, deterioration in relationships were
uneven (they seemed less dangerous, 1770–1773, for example). Perceptive candidates will be
aware that judgement depends, to some extent, on whether the matter is considered from either
the British or American perspective.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be explicitly penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation
and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 6
2
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
How accurate is it to say that the American War of Independence was sustained largely
because of the strength of American patriotism?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: there is clearly a need to
define the key terms but the question is essentially asking whether the war was driven by ideas or
more basic concerns, such as economic advantage or simple survival. It will be necessary to
explore whether the rebels were motivated by a developing nationalism. This might be analysed
through the statements of groups such as the Sons of Liberty or the more well known writings of
Thomas Paine. Corresponding statements by the British crown, government or authorities would
also be useful. Other factors such as the use of conscription by the rebels may open up other
angles about the attitude of the soldiers. The use of the word ‘largely’ in the question will be
seized upon by the stronger candidates in making final judgements. The essay should not be a
discussion of the causes of the war, but some reference to that, if it is used to build a relevant
argument about motivation, should be allowed.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
patriotism, popular sovereignty, and republicanism, enabling them to present clear, focused and
analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and
approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal
with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations
may enhance responses. For example, it may be argued that the war was not entirely about
patriotism but that other ideas and issues were vital, such as economic motivations among the
colonists and indeed the British. The stronger answers should establish that those involved had
all manner of motives and some of whom, such as the conscripts on both sides, had no choice.
Candidates who attempt to distinguish between the ‘myths’ of the Revolution and the realities
should be rewarded.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 7
3
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
Why did the first party system emerge?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: a synthesis of factors is
needed but there must be some form of discrimination as to the relative weighting of the factors.
The following issues will be relevant: the initial division between federalists and anti-federalists
during the debates about the Constitution; the emergence of strong, charismatic personalities,
such as Jefferson and Hamilton, with strong ideological differences; the build up of networks of
support, including a partisan press, by these men; and finally differing foreign policy attitudes to
the French Revolution and relations with Britain. Narratives should be avoided but a chronological
approach which combines analysis is acceptable. The stronger answers will show that the
emergence of the first party system involved a complex interplay of factors.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
the idea of states rights and its root in the fear of the emergence of a new absolutism. A confident
handling of difficult terms such as Democratic-Republicanism will mark out stronger candidates.
Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of
weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered
judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critically evaluate source
material and awareness of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. For
example, it could be argued that the ambitions of the emerging party leaders were as important
as the ideological issues.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 8
4
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
How is the outbreak of war between Britain and the United States in 1812 best explained?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: there needs to be a
synthesis of various factors. A long chronological narrative should be avoided but it is logical to
approach the issues in chronological order. The question will require a multi-factoral approach in
which issues such as tensions over trade during the Napoleonic wars, anger about the
impressing of American citizens into the British navy, growing resentment in America about
British interference in the Indian question and disputes about the border with Canada should
feature. An exploration of the aims and attitudes of President Madison would also be pertinent
and the British perspective should also be touched upon.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
commercial warfare and trade embargoes, enabling them to present clear, focused and analytical
explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches,
and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with
historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may
enhance responses. Several different interpretations are possible. It might be argued that the war
did not have one particular spark but that should not lead to a simple listing of reasons for
tension. The notion that it was an ‘unnecessary war’ implies either that there was not one single
emotive issue, or that the war was sought deliberately, possibly by the President. The stronger
answers will capture some of this uncertainty and complexity.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 9
5
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
Why was there so little opposition to the continuation of the slave system in this period?
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: there should be a multifactoral approach which focuses on Southern resistance to change and the weakness of the early
abolitionist movement. The primary reason for the survival of the slave system, even in the wake
of the Declaration of Independence which stated ‘all men are created equal’, is that the slave
system was central to the cotton industry and that particular industry experienced a huge boom in
the first half of the nineteenth century. The invention of the cotton gin was vital to this. Other
explanatory factors include the entrenched nature of a racist outlook, not just in the South, and
the class status anxiety felt by the southern white working class. The compromises arrived at in
order to preserve the Union – such as the Missouri Compromise of 1820 – will need attention as
will the underlying threat of secession. Stronger answers will create a synthesis of factors which
goes beyond a mere list and discriminates about the relative weighting of the various points.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
slave or free labour, abolitionism and racism, enabling them to present clear, focused and
analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and
approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal
with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations
may enhance responses. Several different interpretations are possible. The importance of slavery
to the cotton industry is likely to feature as the key factor but arguments which seek to stress
other points, such as for example the ingrained attitudes of the time, the parochial culture of the
South or the counter-arguments of the South – and indeed the intended meaning of the initial
Declaration of Independence – should be rewarded.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 10
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
Section 2: c. 1820–1865
6
How influential was the movement to abolish slavery within the United States between
1820 and 1861?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: although a chronological
approach may be appropriate, it is vital that an assessment of the level of influence is maintained.
The development of abolitionism will probably involve a mention of the influence of the British
abolitionist movement, the Liberian Project and the emergence the American Anti-Slavery Society
led by William Garrison and Frederick Douglas. Other supportive groups such as the Quakers,
the Temperance and Women’s rights groups might be touched upon to suggest growing
influence, particularly from the 1840s and 1850s. Some of the obstacles to change will need
attention, such as the importance of slavery to the southern economy and the political willingness
of politicians to avoid confrontation, as seen in the Missouri Compromise. It may be that in the
later phase after John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry, there will be a need to look at how far
abolitionism had brought the nation to the brink of Civil War. Stronger candidates will conclude
with a clear focus on the precise issue of influence.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts – such as
secession and the difference between abolitionism and the compromise positions – this will
enable them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing
up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement.
Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and
of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Clearly a number of interpretations
are possible. Stronger answers will avoid a simple picture of growing influence culminating in war;
it is clear that abolitionism was weak for long periods and that certain campaigns such as the
Liberian project were not very successful. It might be argued that abolitionism, as such, did not
cause the war. The better answers will explore the way the movement became entangled with
other issues.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 11
7
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
To what extent did the presidency of Andrew Jackson change the nature of US politics?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: the main focus should be
on the extent to which Jackson used populist methods to strengthen the powers of the presidency
and how far this re-shaped party alignments. Some discussion of his earlier life might be relevant
in building a picture of a charismatic and possibly demagogic leader. Jackson’s political rhetoric
and policies will need close attention. Specific political battles such as over tariffs or
modernisation of the banks will help to build up a picture of the emergence of a ‘Whig’ opposition
to Jackson. The president’s use of patronage and development of national power base may also
form part of a wider discussion about the changing nature of American politics. Ultimately the
stronger answers will conclude by focusing on the precise wording of the question.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
populism, democracy and the party system. Such understanding will enable students to present
clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and
relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate,
attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing
historical interpretations may enhance responses. For example, it might be argued that whilst
Jackson’s presidency did alter the way American politics operated, some of the changes, such as
the increased electorate across America, were not brought about by Jackson. Hence,
conclusions may need to choose between an opportunist, or positively pro-active, depiction of the
presidency.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 12
8
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
Why did the relationship between Mexico, the Texan settlers and the US government lead
to so much conflict between 1830 and 1848?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: there is a need to examine
both the causes of the war between Mexico and Texas but also the subsequent war fought by the
United States against Mexico. The first conflict will entail an examination of the changing situation
in Texas in the 1830s, particularly the looking at the aims of the growing numbers of settlers and
the attitude of the Mexican government. The events of 1836 need analysis. With regard to the
later war, the role of President Polk needs close attention. The notion that war was deliberately
provoked in order to gain California, and strength the position of Texas as a state of the Union,
should be addressed. A simple narrative of the events is not enough: stronger answers will seek
to arrive at a conclusion which encompasses the differing causes of the respective conflicts.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
Manifest Destiny, annexationism and possibly understand the difference between a state and
federal patriotism. This will enable candidates to present clear, focused and analytical
explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches,
and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with
historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may
enhance responses. Stronger answers will see that there were large economic forces at work as
well as geopolitical strategies and the ambitions of individual leaders.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 13
9
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
With what justification can Abraham Lincoln’s election as US President be seen as the
primary cause of the American Civil War?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: it is not asking for a list of
factors that led to the war; it is asking for an attempt weigh up Lincoln’s influence as against other
factors that may have been the ‘primary cause’. Lincoln’s addresses in the debates with Douglas
and the election campaign of 1860 will need close attention, including the extent of his efforts to
avoid war. The other factors should include the actions of John Brown, the emergence and
hardening of political divisions, the role of the press in building animosity to Lincoln, differing
economic perspectives, and the divisive issues of slavery and secession and the impact of the
1860 election result. The stronger answers will set Lincoln’s role into this wider context and find a
conclusion focusing on the precise wording of the question.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
wage-labour as against slave labour, emancipation, secession and, perhaps, the historical use of
the term ‘catalyst’. This will enable candidates to present clear, focused and analytical
explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches,
and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with
historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may
enhance responses. Clearly a number of interpretations are possible: it is likely that most
students will steer way from the idea that a war with complex causal factors was prompted by the
activities of one man, but this could be contested. Lincoln’s election in 1860, for example, might
be seen as a plausible ‘primary’ cause.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 14
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
10 How important was the quality of generalship in explaining the victory of the Union army
in the American Civil War?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: it is vital that candidates
build towards a concluding synthesis of the various factors which discriminates between the
relative weighting of the given factor. Issues which will need attention would include most of the
following: the quality of the military and political leadership, the respective economic resources,
the role of railroads, the role of the navy as a source of supply, the relative sizes of the armies,
the importance of the ideological issues and the significance of key battles such as Gettysburg.
Long chronological narratives should be avoided but an analysis that follows a chronological
structure is acceptable. The stronger answers will see that more than one perspective is possible
but not shirk the need to find a best explanation.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
attrition, geopolitics and morale, enabling them to present clear, focused and analytical
explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches,
and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with
historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may
enhance responses. The stronger answers will go beyond analyses of key generals or even
particular battles and probe the structural imbalances, such as the respective abilities to supply or
finance the armies.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 15
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
Section 3: Themes c. 1750–c. 1900
11 ‘The settlement of the American West was mainly driven by a combination of land hunger
among the poor and the greed of the railway companies.’ Discuss.
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: clearly the question
requires a close analysis of the two factors mentioned but other factors should also be touched
upon. Land hunger may need a brief definition and will probably entail some sort of comment on
the plight of the poor in the eastern cities. The role of the railways is clearly very important but the
use of the word ‘greed’ will prompt stronger candidates to analyse whether the railway pioneers
were in some sense ‘robber barons’. Alternatively, the railways can be seen as responding to a
pre-existing demand. There should be some attempt to see how government policies – such as
the Homestead Act and the First Pacific Railroad Act – encouraged the two groups in the
question to spread west. The role of influential presidents, such as Polk, should also be explored.
Other factors might include gold and silver rushes, social problems in the cities and the desire to
escape religious or racial persecution. The gradual defeat of Native American resistance might
also be seen as a factor. The stronger answers will remain focused on the two key factors for the
majority of the answer and not just provide a list of factors. Conclusions should pay close
attention to the precise wording of the question.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
‘manifest destiny’ and/or ‘rolling frontier’ and land hunger itself. This should enable them to
present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant
and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where
appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of
differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Stronger answers will see the
complex interplay of factors but will conclude with reference to the two selected factors.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 16
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
12 Why was the way of life of Native Americans so dramatically transformed during the
nineteenth century?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: clearly a multi-factoral
approach will be necessary but stronger answers will discriminate about the relative weighting of
the factors. Official government policy will need close attention and certain key presidencies,
such as that of Jackson, will require more attention than others. Other factors include the rush for
land and minerals, the growth of the railways, the breakdown of agreements, the general culture
clash between nomadic tribes and settling whites and the failure of Indian rebellions. Long
chronological narratives should be avoided as there is almost too much detail: a thematic or
factoral approach is best, although the analysis might well proceed in chronological order.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
culture and assimilation, enabling them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations,
which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving
at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical
evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses.
There is debate to be had about how far the destruction of native American culture was deliberate
or an unintended consequence of a modernising economy. The stronger answers will arrive at a
complex synthesis of the various factors.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 17
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
13 How is the rapid industrialisation of the United States between 1865 and 1914 best
explained?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: the stronger answers will
go beyond a mere listing of factors and look to place emphasis on some points above others.
Factors should include most of the following: the victory of the industrial North in the Civil War,
government policies such as protective tariffs, raw materials, markets, communication networks,
such as the railroads and the existence of an entrepreneurial culture and corporate finance
systems. Individual entrepreneurs, such as Carnegie or Morgan, might be examined but the
stronger answers set their lives into a more structural analysis. A broad brush approach will be
necessary, rather than a chronological narrative, given the lengthy time frame.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
entrepreneurialism, corporations, supply and demand. This will enable candidates to present
clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and
relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate,
attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing
historical interpretations may enhance responses. There is, for example, a significant debate
about how far the Civil War promoted industrialisation. The stronger answers should arrive at a
complex synthesis.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 18
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
14 To what extent and why did the role of women in American society change between 1850
and 1920?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: there needs to be an
evaluation of the extent of change, rather than list of areas in which change was occurring. Given
the length of the time frame and the broad nature of the question, chronological narratives should
be avoided. Statistics may be useful in supporting the view that the majority of women were
restricted to the domestic sphere and that change was not that great. For example, in 1870 only
13% of women worked outside the home and by 1920 the figure was not dramatically higher.
However, it should be explained that women’s experience varied according to class and race.
The rise of industrialisation in this period saw many women relinquish domestic service for factory
work. Towards the end of the century women also began to find employment in clerical work. In
addition to this there were women who forged political careers, such as Elizabeth Stanton in the
suffrage movement. The success of this movement would seem to suggest that attitudes were
changing quite quickly in the later part of the period. More social issues, such as access to
contraception, might be thought as important as enfranchisement. Conclusions in the stronger
answers will seek to judge whether the changes in this period should be seen as considerable,
modest or negligible. It may be that the judgement could be quite complex, allowing for different
assessments according to class, ethnicity and location within America.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
patriarchy, rights and the relationships between class, race and gender, enabling them to present
clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and
relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate,
attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing
historical interpretations may enhance responses. Although the majority of women did not
experience dramatic change, there is room for arguments which stress that this situation was
changing quite rapidly and that a minority of women, particularly in the middle class, found new
roles for themselves. However, candidates who wish to stress the persistence of what might be
termed traditional values may well achieve high marks, if they have shown awareness of some
areas of change as well.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 19
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
15 How much light do American novels of the nineteenth century shed on social change
within the United States?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: it will be important that
answers explore not only the way that novels can illuminate social changes but also the extent to
which they tend to deal with limited and rather particular social realms. Given that the question is
asking about American novels broadly, it will be expected that the better answers will refer to
more than one novel, although it may be that one author receives the majority of attention. The
range of authors that might be referred to is of course large, but the most likely would be Mark
Twain, Henry James, James Fenimore Cooper, Nathaniel Hawthorne and Edith Wharton. Such
authors shed light on many changing aspects of American life, from the culture of the South to
the rolling frontier, women’s changing role and America’s relationship with Europe, particularly in
terms of class. The stronger answers may see both the strengths and weaknesses of the novel
as a source for historians dealing with social change.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
the utility of fiction as a historical source and the deeper questions around the idea of truth. This
will enable candidates to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of
weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arrive at a well-considered
judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source
material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. This area of History is
open to all manner of interpretations but the more able candidates will range widely and see
some of the difficulties in using the novel to supply information about the American experience.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 20
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
16 How is the rapid spread of the railway network across the United States in the nineteenth
century best explained?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: the stronger answers will
go beyond a mere listing of factors and look to place emphasis on some points above others.
Factors should include most of the following: the rise in population (linked to immigration) and the
growth of towns and cities which needed to be served and supplied, and so acted as a spur to the
railways; innovations in transportation, the advantages of railways (they were generally faster,
cheaper and more reliable) over other forms of transport such as the stagecoach and the
steamboat, the demand for expansion in connexion with the transportation of industrial goods,
westward expansion and the opportunities it afforded, the desire for improved links and
communication between East and West and the direct stimulus of competition to develop routes
e.g. the transcontinental line. Also, the impact of the Civil War and growth of US industry could
be looked at. There are legislative acts to consider (i.e. generous grants of land, huge loans),
and connexions to all manner of other issues, such as the clash with Native Americans and the
opening up of opportunities for immigrants and various kinds of pioneer or entrepreneur
(Vanderbilt, Harriman). The stronger answers will be characterised by analyses of the various
factors provided. A broad brush approach will be necessary, rather than a chronological narrative,
given the lengthy time frame.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
the historical use of the term ‘catalyst’ and, possibly, technological determinism. Other notions
such as economic modernisation or industrialisation may also be relevant. It is vital that
candidates present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up
the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arrive at a well-considered judgement.
Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and
of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. As this is a thematic question it is
possible that candidates will arrive at different judgement but the stronger answers will range
widely, support arguments with detail and arrive at conclusion that relates sharply to the precise
question.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 21
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
Section 4: 1865–1914
17 ‘For African Americans, the era of Redemption was little better than a tyranny’. Discuss.
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: most importantly the
question is asking whether the creation of the Jim Crow system was equivalent to a new form of
tyranny. Candidates may well feel that the question is asking for some sort of comparison
between the slave system and Jim Crow in terms of degrees of oppression. Chronological
narratives are not appropriate but the analysis can be structured along chronological lines.
Content is likely to focus first on the advances made in the era of Reconstruction, such as the
amendments to the constitution, the work of the Freedman’s bureau and the subsequent
progress made. However, the backlash in the era of Redemption is more important, particularly
the rise of Jim Crow laws and the eventual emergence of the ‘separate but equal’ doctrine. The
harshness of that period, given the prevalence of lynching, will make it possible to see a new
tyranny emerging but candidates should also see that there was still opportunity for escape in
that era, such as in the Great Migration. The stronger answers will allow for the complex and
contradictory nature of the historical situation by the turn of the century.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
tyranny, oppression, ‘Jim Crow’ and segregation. It may be that the difference between de jure
and de facto segregation is useful. The idea of Revolution and Counter Revolution may also help
the analysis of Reconstruction and Redemption. It is vital that candidates present clear, focused
and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors
and approaches, and arrive at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal
with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations
may enhance responses. Stronger answers will explore the concept of tyranny and the implied
suggestion that Jim Crow America left African Americans in a situation almost as bad as the
slave era. The oppressive nature of the Jim Crow South and socio-economic precariousness of
the post-emancipation experience will be demonstrated by stronger candidates, but some
awareness of positive developments should be looked at, even if final conclusions are fairly
negative.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 22
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
18 How influential were socialist ideas within the United States between 1880 and 1920?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: it may be necessary to
define socialist ideas but it is also important to realise that socialism had several aspects to it but,
above all, it is vital to assess the level of its influence. Candidates will want to explore socialism
as part of the Trade Union movement’s ideology but there is also a need to look at the
emergence of the Socialist Party of America under Eugene Debs and also at the International
Workers of the World. Stronger candidates will also see the influence of socialist ideas within the
Progressive and Populist movements. The context in which socialist groups operated will also
require attention: U.S. entry into World War One, for example, created a crisis for American
Socialism, with many socialists, such as Debs, going to prison. The Bolshevik Revolution in
Russia also helped to promote a crackdown on socialists in the post-war Red Scare. Content
may be structured in a chronological fashion but analysis should keep the demands of the
question under review throughout.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
the distinction between types of socialism, ranging from revolutionary Marxism, the anarchosyndicalism of the IWW, moderate Trade Unionism and liberal Progressivism. It is vital that
candidates present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up
the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arrive at a well-considered judgement.
Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and
of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. There is a lot that might be said
about socialist ideas within America, but it is also the case that the Socialist party and even Trade
Unionism were relatively small organisations, in terms of numbers. Certainly, by 1920, American
Socialism looks quite weak but it might be contended that socialist ideas were nevertheless still
highly influential. The very fact of a Red Scare suggests significant influence. Stronger answers
will show awareness that different interpretations are possible.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 23
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
19 Account for the political influence of William Jennings Bryan.
Candidates should:
AO1 – Bryan had influence in the politics of the US in the twenty years prior to the outbreak of
World War One. Candidates should acknowledge his importance in the Populist and Progressive
Movements and the anti-imperialism of the period. However, the emphasis should be on
explaining the reasons for the influence he exerted in these areas. He was an effective orator
with a zeal and idealism that proved persuasive. His ‘Cross of Gold’ speech at the Convention of
the Democratic Party in 1896 was a sensation. However, candidates may argue that his
demagogic style also alienated many, including traditional farmers and he was denounced in
conservative quarters, including the main newspapers. He was also an indefatigable campaigner:
as a presidential candidate in 1896 he travelled 18,000 miles and secured 6.5 million votes
against McKinley who won by a narrow margin. Bryan prevailed in the South and West but he
failed to convince industrial workers in the eastern States. His ability to tap into contemporary
concerns about current issues also accounts for his influence. He recognised the power of the
Populist Movement and offered economic policies, notably the rejection of the Gold Standard that
chimed with the demands of distressed farmers. Bryan helped form the Anti-Imperialist League of
1898 in opposition to the war in Cuba which channelled the considerable anxiety about US
foreign policy. In 1912 his decision to support Wilson as the presidential candidate of the
Democratic Party was crucial, a move explained by his recognition of the widespread support for
the Progressive agenda that Wilson represented. Candidates may criticise him as an opportunist
and there is little doubt that his political influence would probably not have outlasted the election
campaign of 1896 if he had not adapted his policies and strategies. To some extent
circumstances help explain his influence. However, even candidates critical of his manoeuvrings
might recognise some consistency of principle in his championship of the citizen and the ideals of
the US Constitution against the ambition of ‘big business’. In addition, the weakness of the
Republicans – their caution in 1896, the split between radicals and conservatives thereafter –
allowed Bryan political influence. On the other hand, fear of Bryan galvanised the wealthy who
were encouraged to increase their funding of the Republican Party.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, enabling
them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the
relevant and relative factors and approaches and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where
appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of
differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. A descriptive narrative may be
adopted but is likely to be less effective than one that analyses different factors. Either way, in the
process candidates should be able to prioritise factors. Better answers will attempt to weigh the
influence of Bryan to the extent that some may suggest his influence was largely illusory or, at
best, spasmodic.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 24
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
20 How far is it accurate to describe American foreign policy between 1880 and 1914 as
essentially imperialist?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: it will be necessary to
show awareness of the fact that imperialism is a term which may be defined in differing ways.
Much will depend upon this point. If imperialism is defined narrowly, as a deliberate quest to
construct a formal empire of directly ruled colonies, then content will be reduced to examples
such as the acquisition of Puerto Rico, the Philippines and Guam, after the Spanish-American
War. However, if imperialism is defined more broadly, it could encompass the drive for markets
and raw materials, for example with regard to the open door policy in China. Imperialist ideology
should also be explored, looking at the ‘civilising mission’, racial thinking and belief in naval
power. A narrative of events should be avoided but the analysis may be set out in a chronological
fashion. Given that the question extends to 1914, stronger candidates will look at the nature of
Wilson’s foreign policy, as possibly something of a break from imperialism.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts such as
imperialism, informal empire, social darwinism and racism. It is vital that candidates present clear,
focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative
factors and approaches, and arrive at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts
to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical
interpretations may enhance responses. At the heart of the question is the meaning of the term
imperialist. Stronger candidates will get to grips with this concept and should also explore the
question of whether Wilson was anti-imperial. Clearly, several interpretations are possible;
stronger candidates will capture that complexity.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 25
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
21 How successful was Woodrow Wilson’s first term as President?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required. Candidates are likely to
base their response on an analysis of Wilson’s programme called ‘The New Freedom’. Its attack
on Trusts in the Clayton Act provided for more competition but its effects depended on its
interpretation by the judges who were reluctant to use it against the rich. On the other hand, the
investigation of fair trade was more successful. The Underwood Tariff of 1913 reduced the
general level of import tax and so made the importation of goods cheaper. However, the shortfall
in revenue was met with increased taxation of the rich. The new federal banking system he
created seemed successful in creating stability in banking which was essential to the
development of the economy. Other measures to improve conditions in the merchant marine, in
building roads, establishing the 8 hour day, and providing compensation for injury at work were
largely successful. His record abroad was less successful. Events in Mexico led to American
military involvement in the country and although peace with Mexico was achieved, Pancho Villa
was not captured and peace was at a human cost. His attempts to mediate between the warring
nations in Europe failed and his reluctance to intervene on the side of the Allies was not popular
especially in the wake of the sinking of the Lusitania and British policy of blockading Europe and
the black listing of some American firms was irritating. On the other hand, his policy of nonintervention benefitted American business and trade with Britain in war materials was highly
profitable. Most Americans did not want to engage in affairs they regarded as not their own and in
that sense Wilson’s policy was successful.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, enabling
them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the
relevant and relative factors and approaches and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where
appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of
differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Better answers are likely to establish
what Wilson’s objectives were against which his actions might be judged. Reference to his
inaugural speech of 1913 would be a very good way of doing this. Some may distinguish between
his domestic record and his foreign policy but better answers will recognise that whatever his
successes there were shortcomings in his policies at home and abroad. Reference to his second
term would not be inappropriate if this was done to highlight the key elements of his policies in his
first term by way of contrast.
AO3 – [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be explicitly penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation
and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 26
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
Section 5: 1914–1953
22 ‘The weakness of the US economy in the 1920s outweighed its strength.’ Discuss.
Candidates should:
AO1 – The fact that the Great Depression began with the Wall Street Crash in late 1929 and
lasted for at least 4 years, arguably throughout the 1930s, might encourage most candidates to
argue that the weaknesses in the US economy did, indeed, outweigh its strengths. More
perceptive analyses will argue that despite its weaknesses the strengths of the US economy were
greater and problems experienced in the following decade were to do with factors other than
weaknesses in the US economy. Protectionism may be considered as a weakness in so far as
tariffs were reciprocated with damaging effects on US exports. However, they helped secure the
domestic market against foreign competition. This discussion might be widened to consider the
role of government as a whole. Was the laissez-faire economics of the 1920s a weakness or
strength? Overproduction of goods might be assessed as a weakness given the limitations to
demand but the efficiency of industry and the beneficial effect of higher wages for industrial
workers in stimulating demand will need to be weighed. This might link to the issue of the
distortions in the internal market with the imbalance between those with disposable income and
those without (poor farmers and Blacks). Some will regard the ease with which credit could be
obtained, the associated speculation on the Stock Market and the lack of regulation of the
banking system as financial weaknesses that fed directly into the collapse of 1929. It could be
argued that markets are self regulating and the prosperity of the 1920s is an indication of the
strength of the financial sector. The problems of agriculture, especially the overproduction of food
which impoverished many farmers, was clearly a weakness in the economy. However, more
people lived in towns, agriculture was susceptible to downturns as in the 1880s and 1890s and
farmers were supported, to some extent, by the governments of the 1920s with financial schemes
and the encouragement given to co-operatives. Candidates who argue that the strengths of the
US economy outweigh its weaknesses may argue that international problems, such as the
inhibiting effects of reparations in Europe and political instability in different parts of the world,
were more important.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, enabling
them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the
relevant and relative factors and approaches and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where
appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of
differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Some candidates will choose to deal
with the weakness of the US economy and then consider its strengths, leading to a judgement.
An examination of a range of factors in turn looking at the weaknesses and strengths of each is
more likely to generate discussion and a more sustained analysis. A final judgement should be
attempted even if it is ambivalent. Reference to the Wall Street Crash and subsequent
developments could be made relevant.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 27
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
23 How accurate is the view that in the period 1920 to 1941 the United States followed a
policy of isolationism?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: there is be a need to
clarify what is meant by isolationism. A narrative approach should be avoided but a chronological
approach could work as long as the issue is kept under analysis. Content should focus upon the
shift away from Wilson’s interventionism to Harding’s alternative approach. The refusal to join the
League should also be examined. In addition to this, it might be that isolationism is also relevant
to other policies such as the restrictions on immigration and the placing of tariffs on foreign
goods. The neutrality acts of the 1930s might also be seen as part of an isolationist approach.
Franklin Roosevelt’s presidency will need close analysis. Stronger answers will look at
countervailing trends such as America’s engagement with international diplomacy through such
agreements as the Washington Conference or the Briand – Kellogg pact. Roosevelt’s approach
also saw a gradual shift away from isolationism, although the nature of this shift is open to
debate.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical and economic
concepts, such as isolationism, interventionism and armed neutrality. It is vital that candidates
present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant
and relative factors and approaches, and arrive at a well-considered judgement. Where
appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of
differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Interpretations will be determined to
some extent by the understanding of the term isolationism. Stronger answers will define it more
broadly, seeing economic and cultural aspects to it. There is also a significant debate to be had
about the intentions of Franklin Roosevelt: whether he was always a frustrated interventionist or
was pushed into war by Japanese actions.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 28
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
24 How justified was the opposition to the New Deal?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required. Opposition was
widespread. Those on the right accused FDR of socialism and those on the left of failing to do
enough. On the right the Republican Party and various State legislatures, big business and
groups like the Liberty League rejected the intervention of government in economic and social
affairs and the apparent threat to individual freedom which they believed the New Deal
represented. Examples of policies that epitomised such fears need to be explored, for instance,
the Social Security Act, the Public Utility Holding Company Act, the National Recovery
Administration and increases in tax. Such policies may have challenged the principles of those on
the right but most were compromises. Furthermore, many measures were welcomed by the right,
for example, the legislation which modernised the banking system and individual entrepreneurs
backed the New Deal. The judgements of the Supreme Court in challenging the constitutionalism
of various aspects of the New Deal could be explored. Did their verdicts confirm the charge of
FDR’s opponents that he was exceeding his powers? His attack on the Supreme Court evoked
widespread criticism. The opposition of those on the left, such as socialists and communists and
various welfare pressure groups, for example, the ‘Share Our Wealth’ campaign, could be
assessed by examining some of the alphabet laws, for example, the CCC, FERA, CWA, PWA,
and their impact on employment and social welfare. Did the AAA go far enough to help farmers
and did the economic gains of the TVA compromise the environment? Further, trades unions
were largely supportive of the New Deal and the electorate voted for FDR in 1936 in
overwhelming numbers. The state of the economy on the eve of WW2 might be considered to
assess whether the opposition of the left was justified.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, enabling
them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the
relevant and relative factors and approaches and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where
appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of
differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Candidates may opt to assess a
range of policies discretely but given the scale of the New Deal analysis is likely to be more
effective if the emphasis is on the nature of the opposition and the selective examination of
aspects of the New Deal to judge whether opposition was justified. Nonetheless, either approach
would be valid.
AO3 – [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be explicitly penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation
and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 29
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
25 How significant was the role of the United States in the defeat of Germany in the Second
World War?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required. The factual content
should include the following main topics: the role of the US in the D-Day operations (some
candidates might argue that the landings were rather later than they might have been – 1943 may
have been possible, so did the US delay the defeat of Germany?) and subsequent ‘drive on
Berlin’ – the US strategy of a ‘broad front’ rather than ‘a dash’ for Berlin could be discussed, and
perhaps linked to the Soviet Union in that they reached Berlin ahead of the Americans and so
brought the war to an end sooner; US actions in Africa and then Southern Italy, the role of the US
in other aspects of the war such as in terms of naval and aerial conflict; the nature of US military
technology, supplies, propaganda and ideology. Key figures such as Eisenhower or Patton may
also need attention. Inevitably, other factors will need to be looked at. The role of the Soviet
Union in the defeat of Germany should certainly receive attention; its contribution was to divide
German forces and occupy the bulk of their army, so reducing resistance to the Americans in the
West. It might also be argued that the internal weaknesses of Nazi Germany – for example the
excessive reliance on the Fuhrer – contributed significantly. Also, the role of Britain could be
considered as a factor in so far as Britain stood alone until 1941(really 1942) in Europe, that it
was British forces that inflicted a major blow at El Alamein in 1942 and that without Britain the
Americans would not have been able to enter the war in Europe at all, certainly not from Britain to
launch the D Day landings for example. The US Lend-Lease deal with Britain, without which
Britain would have struggled to stay in the war in the first two years could also be considered,
along with US bombing raids over Germany (again only possible with Britain as a base).
Conclusions should relate sharply to the precise words of the question.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
attrition, propaganda, alliances and unconditional surrender. The way that Roosevelt and
Churchill shaped the ideological purpose of the war might draw candidates into exploring notions
of freedom as against totalitarianism. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical
explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches,
and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with
historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may
enhance responses. For example, it might well be argued that the US shared with the Soviet
Union the main responsibility for the defeat of Nazi Germany. Other perspectives are possible
and the stronger answers will explore some of these, thereby demonstrating the complex nature
of this period of military history.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 30
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
26 How can the ‘Red Scare’ of the late 1940s and early 1950s be best explained?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: the central issue here is
whether the McCarthyite era can be explained simply as an attempt to discover and defeat
Communists at home or whether it was driven by other factors. However, there are ambiguities in
the question which might allow candidates legitimately to open other angles, such as in exploring
how the motive forces behind Cold War foreign policy differed from those forces behind the antiCommunist crusade at home. For example, it might be argued that anti-Communism at home
was not about containment but complete destruction. Simple chronological narratives should be
avoided but analysis may well proceed in chronological order. In analysing what created the Red
Scare it will be necessary at least to look at the way the Cold War abroad affected internal
American politics. The ‘loss’ of China in 1949 and the beginning of the Korean War are important
in creating climate of panic within America. However, it is also true that American politicians
sought to exploit the mood in order to advance their own or their party’s fortunes. Truman for
example instituted a loyalty test before McCarthy became prominent. McCarthy’s motives and
methods will need examination. In addition to that, the activities of the FBI are also important in
generating fear of an internal red threat. The role of the press is also important. Stronger answers
will develop a synthesis will conclude with reference to the precise wording of the question.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
the Red Scare, political paranoia and possibly the use of the term ‘witch-hunt’. Candidates should
present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant
and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where
appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of
differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Interpretations may vary in terms of
emphasis but the stronger answers will focus on the interplay between foreign and domestic
issues and on the role of personal ambition. Nixon and McCarthy are most relevant here. The
extent to which there was some genuine cause for concern about left-wing subversion of America
is also a most debateable area; the case of Alger Hiss, for example, still provokes controversy.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 31
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
Section 6: 1953–2000
27 To what extent, if at all, should Eisenhower be regarded as a successful president?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: this appears to be a fairly
straightforward question but the stronger candidates will give some thought to the meaning of the
term ‘successful’. A chronological approach is acceptable but simple narrative should be avoided.
The content is likely to include discussion of Eisenhower’s foreign policy: the situation at the end
of the Korean War, involvement in Iran, the ‘new look’ policies, the Hungarian Uprising, tensions
between NATO and the Warsaw Pact and Eisenhower’s response to the Cuban revolution. Other
issues might be included, possibly, even the beginnings of the space race and the arms race and
summit diplomacy. The domestic policies should include Eisenhower’s response to the
McCarthyite witch-hunt, his handling of the Little Rock Crisis, his relationship with Congress and
his role in prompting the economic boom of the 1950s. Stronger answers will also look at the
fostering of his folksy image and perhaps even see this as helping to develop a perception of a
successful president.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts such as
‘containment’, the Eisenhower doctrine, McCarthyism, paranoia and possibly charisma. In foreign
policy terms, the definition of containment will allow a judgement to be made about the level of
success. ‘Roll-Back’ might be referred to and the idea of ‘spheres of influence’ could be useful. In
domestic policy, the electoral fortunes of the Republicans might be seen as an index of his
success. Candidates must present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable
of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered
judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source
material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. It might well be argued
that Eisenhower’s likeable image masked some serious failings, such as inaction over Hungary,
mishandling of Cuba and possibly even lack of initiative with regard to the Civil Rights movement.
Alternatively, it could be argued that in most areas – in his relationship with Congress for
example – he was more successful than unsuccessful.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 32
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
28 How much credit does Johnson deserve for the Civil Rights legislation passed during his
presidency?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: establishing the nature of
Kennedy’s agenda is vital but an informed knowledge of Johnson’s ‘Great Society’ legislation is
also required. Kennedy in his ‘new frontier’ speech arguably sketched out aims to bring in reforms
in areas relating to education, Civil Rights and poverty. However, it should be pointed out that his
rhetoric was not very specific. Johnson did implement reforms in these areas but he also went
further and that will need attention. Johnson’s domestic achievements were extensive,
particularly two major Civil Rights Acts (1964, 1968), and the Voting Rights Act (1965). Also of
note are the following: the Economic Opportunity Act, Medicare and Medicaid, Education acts,
and environmental reforms. Johnson’s personal contribution to the passage of these acts should
be looked at. His persuasion of Congress, his negotiations with Civil Rights leaders and the
speed with which he moved suggest that he deserved much credit. Further, if much of what was
introduced in his Acts was based on what JFK planned the fact is that Johnson chaired the
PCEEO (President’s Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity) that had devised much of
what JFK approved. It could be argued that measures to help the poor in general, i.e. the
Economic Opportunity Act, Medicare and Medicaid mentioned above, also helped blacks a lot.
However, the Congress of 1964 was dominated by liberal Democrats so he had support on the
Hill (he still had to marshall it), the civil rights leaders deserve credit, the JFK legacy of sympathy
after his death was important. The media were also instrumental in forcing Johnson’s hand eg.
the coverage of the Selma to Montgomery March forced Johnson to federalise the National
Guard in Alabama. On the debit side, perhaps he could have done more? He was offended by
the riots of 1965 and 1967 (yet 2 of the 3 Acts mentioned above followed these events), Vietnam
became a serious distraction, he declined Martin Luther King’s pleas for a Bill of Rights for the
Disadvantaged and as a result their relationship floundered. Simple chronological narratives
should be avoided but analysis may well proceed in chronological order. Stronger answers will
explore whether Johnson went beyond Kennedy’s agenda and may well compare their political
methods and the political contexts within which they operated.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
the meaning of the ‘New Frontier’ and the ‘Great Society’. Notions of a legacy and the impact of
an apparent political martyrdom might also be relevant. Candidates should present clear, focused
and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors
and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to
deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical
interpretations may enhance responses. Exploring the mythology of Kennedy might allow
candidates to revise stereotypical notions and argue for Johnson as a more effective president
and his reforms as being far more extensive than those Kennedy attempted or aimed to achieve
in the longer term. Stronger answers will conclude with close reference to the precise wording of
the question.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 33
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
29 ‘Of all the presidents dealing with the Vietnam conflict, President Johnson deserves the
most criticism for the eventual failure.’ Discuss.
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: a chronological analysis of
president after president is legitimate, but Johnson will need a lengthier treatment than the
others. Candidates should avoid treating this simply as an essay asking for a broad analysis of
why America failed which might reduce Johnson to a small factor. Eisenhower and Kennedy
should be examined in terms of initial US involvement and early escalation. Johnson’s decision to
escalate on a much greater scale needs evaluation as will the reasons for the relative failure of
this course. Domestic reactions to the Vietnam War, and Johnson’s response to that, will need
examination. Nixon will also need close attention as he, arguably, tried and failed to extract
America without the sense of failure and with honour. Although there are numerous factors which
led to the lack of success, the essay is primarily about presidential policies and the stronger
answers will keep that as the predominant focus.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
guerrilla warfare, ‘hearts and minds’ and the ‘counter culture’. The concept of ‘mission creep’ may
be useful. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are
capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a wellconsidered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical
evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses.
Interpretations may vary but many will argue that Johnson and Nixon lost the war on the home
front with events like the shooting of protestors at Kent State University. Johnson’s inability to
persuade the American people of the rightness of his course led to his unpopularity and decision
not to run in 1968. It might well be argued that Johnson was unfortunate and even tragic, in as
much as his preferred focus was meant to be on creating the Great Society at home. Stronger
answers will demonstrate the complexity of the problems faced by the various presidents and
explore their skill in dealing with the whole situation.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 34
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
30 To what extent did the reputation of the presidency diminish during the 1970s?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: there is clearly a need to
assess the gravity and cumulative effect of a number of crises. The flowing content is relevant:
Johnson’s unpopularity in 1968, Nixon’s controversial bombing of Cambodia and Laos, the
Watergate scandal, Ford’s relative weakness and the pardon for Nixon, the foreign policy
calamities of Carter, such as the Tehran hostage crisis and the perceived weak response to the
Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan. Simple chronological narratives should be avoided but
analysis may well proceed in chronological order. The effects of the Watergate scandal is at the
heart of this question but students may prefer to stress other elements, and underlying economic
problems after the oil crisis might also be used profitably.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
‘Machiavellian’, the imperial and imperilled presidency, corruption and stagflation. Candidates
should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the
relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where
appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of
differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. It might well be argued that the
various presidents faced an unusually complex conjunction of problems in the 1970s from a war
that had become unwinnable to a new set of problems in the near east. Nixon’s corruption
probably did most to damage the reputation of the office but Nixon also achieved quite a lot, such
as in his détente initiatives. Furthermore, it might be argued that Carter was unfortunate in certain
respects and did not damage the reputation of the office. The propaganda of the Reagan
campaign, which sought to depict America as enfeebled under Carter, might also be used.
Stronger candidates will see that much depends on public and global perceptions.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 35
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
31 What, if anything, were the achievements of the policy of détente in the 1960s and 1970s?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: although there are specific
agreements and diplomatic accords that need attention, there is a need to assess whether this
ultimately failed and led to a tougher policy under Reagan. Simple chronological narratives
should be avoided but analysis may well proceed in chronological order. Content should focus on
Nixon’s initiatives with regard to negotiating the SALT treaty and opening relations with China.
Other elements such as the symbolic link-up in space might be seen as part of a wider cultural
thaw. However, it might legitimately be argued that détente had earlier roots in summit diplomacy
and in the improving of communications between the Soviet Union and America after the Cuban
missile crisis. The eventual failure of détente in 1979 with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan will
need assessment, as will Reagan’s change of tack. Stronger candidates will be able to set the
policy into a context which explores what went before and came after.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
détente itself, the thaw and, possibly, Kissinger’s notion of realpolitik. Candidates should present
clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and
relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate,
attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing
historical interpretations may enhance responses. Although there may be a tendency simply to
list what happened during the détente era, stronger answers will see the wider context and may
even see that in the more hard-line Reagan era, elements of the earlier approach survived, such
as in the START agreements.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 36
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
32 ‘Both in domestic and foreign policy, Clinton’s presidency marked a decisive shift away
from the Republican ideology of the 1980s.’ Discuus.
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: Republican ideology will
need to be accurately defined. At the least there is a need to identify the economic approach with
its belief in low taxes, small government and cuts in welfare in order to break the dependency
culture. Clinton’s battles with Congress over the federal deficit will need attention as will his North
American Free Trade Agreement. In foreign policy terms the task is a little more complicated as
the collapse of the Soviet Union by 1991 meant that Clinton faced different problems than those
of the 1980s. However, both Reagan and Bush senior followed a fairly tough foreign policy and
Clinton’s foreign policy interventions, such as in Somalia, Bosnia and Kosovo, will need to be
compared in general approach. Stronger candidates will focus on the specific question, which
asks for a comparative approach, rather than simply an assessment of Clinton.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
Republican ‘neo-liberalism’ and on Clinton’s side the idea of liberal interventionism and the Third
Way. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of
weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered
judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source
material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Arguably, Clinton did
represent something of a shift, particularly in his attitude to public finances. However, his foreign
policy was arguably hesitant and perhaps not based on coherent principles. His problems with
Congress and the Lewinsky affair will have to be woven into the wider ideological discussion.
Clinton’s reputation may suggest a politician driven by opportunism rather than of ideas and
stronger candidates will explore this area of debate.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 37
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
Section 7: Themes c. 1900–2000
33 ‘The history of the United States saw a period of prolonged growth, culminating in a
profound economic crisis.’ Assess this view of the US between 1941 and 1980.
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: the question is probably
best dealt with in two parts, looking at the reasons for the boom and the reasons for the crisis of
the later 1970s. Simple chronological narratives should be avoided as this question requires
structural economic assessments. The impact of the Second World War on the American
economy will need attention. In addition, the post-war population boom, new consumer markets,
relatively cheap raw materials – such as oil – will also need attention. Government polices in the
post-war period, such as low tax thresholds, support for consumer credit mechanisms and limited
intervention against large corporations, should be assessed in terms of the relative weight of that
factor. The lack of global competition in the post-war environment is also important, although the
impact of the Marshall Plan should be touched upon. The crisis of the 1970s will need to be
explored and fundamental to that are the oil price rises beginning in the 1970s. Other reasons for
low growth and inflation will need to be explored. Stronger students will offer an overall
conclusion.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical and economic
concepts, such as consumerism and stagflation. Candidates should present clear, focused and
analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and
approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal
with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations
may enhance responses. There is debate to be had about the importance of government policies
in bringing about both the boom and the later problems. It might be argued, for example, that in
both cases external factors created the conditions that determined the economic outcomes.
World War Two for example was a profound catalyst for American expansion after 1945. Stronger
candidates will keep the complexity of this large question under control.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 38
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
34 How accurate is the view that the presidential office increased its power dramatically in
the period 1933 to 1969?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: at the heart of the question
is the notion of an expanding executive authority which considerably shifted the balance of the
constitution. The question is not asking whether this was a good or bad development but whether
it can be said to have happened. Content would probably focus first on Roosevelt’s extensions of
presidential authority in his battles with Congress and the Supreme Court in order to push
through the New Deal legislation. After that the context of the War and the Cold War seemed to
facilitate great presidential power. Truman’s decision to go to war in Korea without seeking a
Congressional declaration of war is important. Johnson’s actions in Vietnam might also seem to
show great presidential power. Stronger answers will discriminate between presidents whilst still
seeing overall patterns.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts such as
the imperial presidency, checks and balances within the constitution, and ‘over-mighty’ executive
power. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable
of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered
judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source
material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. There is an existing
debate about the ‘imperial presidency’ and that might be mentioned but it should still be possible
to handle the debate very well without actually using the term. Stronger answers will explore the
various presidencies and perhaps focus on key words in the question.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 39
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
35 How convincing is the argument that after World War Two a distinctively US style of art
and architecture emerged?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: essentially candidates
must assess the hypothesis that the Nazi invasion of France, and specifically the occupation of
Paris, prompted a flight from Europe of the major artists and collectors and that after 1945 the
epicentre of the modern art business became America, or more specifically New York. Evidence
might be that the major post-war art movements of abstract expressionism and Pop Art seemed
to be centred in New York. Indeed post-war pop culture in general was distinctly American. Art
dealers and collectors such as Peggy Guggenheim seem to embody the wider notion of a flight
from Paris back to New York. In the 1920s and 1930s Paris had undoubtedly exerted a great pull
upon American writers and artists but after the war the pull was possibly in the opposite direction.
In the 1950s, in the person of Jackson Pollock, the United States discovered its first major
indigenous modern artist. Many artists of European descent such as de Kooning and Rothko had
relocated to the US and remained there for their working lives. Architectural styles as well as
architects are difficult to pigeon-hole by nationality. Cross fertilisation and the commissioning of
architects world-wide in the 20th century means a case can be made that there is no distinctly US
style of architecture any more than there is in any other country. Rather, there are architectural
styles that are universal, notably Modernism and Postmodernism. The former – characterised by
simplified form, flat sides, horizontal and vertical lines, glass and iron etc – and the latter which
blended some aesthetic elements of the pre modern era were the styles in Europe and Australia
as well as America. So, La Defense in Paris can be equated with the likes of the Seagram
Building in New York City (1958). Sky-scrappers may have been first built in America but they
were a style of building adopted elsewhere. That being said, some architects claimed to be
representative of a distinctly American style of architecture. Frank Lloyd Wright (d 1959) was one
and his influence on subsequent generations of American architects, such as Louis Kahn (d
1974), Buckminster Fuller (d 1983) or Charles and Ray Eames, was immense and ensured a
thread of continuity of style in the US. This could be characterised by the emphasis on spaces –
open plans and the blurring of indoor and outdoor spaces – for example, The Case Study Houses
(1945–66) in and around Los Angeles. Some argue that Postmodernist architecture started in
America (influence of Robert Venturi might be stressed: museums in Seattle in 1985 and San
Diego 1996), but if originally distinctive, it too became a universal style. Stronger candidates will
explore this broad question and arrive at a synthesis.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts such as
Modern Art itself, avant garde, abstract expressionism and popular culture. Candidates should
present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant
and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where
appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of
differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. It might be objected that something as
complex as ‘Modern art’ would not have one particular home. The rise of French New Wave
cinema, for example, might be used to undermine arguments for American predominance. It
might also be argued that the rise of New York as the centre of Modern Art marketing and
production is not quite the same thing as the idea of the United States as a whole becoming the
home of modern Art. It could be pointed out that during the McCarthy era much of America was
very hostile to all avant garde art, much of which was seen as un-American. There is, however,
an argument which states that the abstract expressionism of painters like Pollock was seized
upon by some as exemplifying a uniquely American, individualist ethos. Stronger candidates will
explore these contradictions.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 40
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
36 How persuasive is the view that between the 1960s and the 1980s there was a cultural civil
war unfolding within the United States?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: although there is a need to
look at a number of social events and movements, candidates must not lose sight of the precise
wording of the question which asks how ‘persuasive’ the idea is. Stronger conclusions will allude
to specific wording of the question. Content will focus on the component parts of the so-called
Counter-Culture and the emergence of a conservative backlash in the seventies culminating in
Reaganism. Within the Counter-Culture were several overlapping and/or colliding submovements, such as the anti-war movement, the ‘New Left’, the hippies, Civil Rights and Black
Power, feminism and gay rights. The backlash would include Nixon’s appeal to the ‘silent
majority’ and his electoral successes. Reagan’s emergence should be charted, particularly his
exploitation of conservative America’s distrust of unpatriotic sentiment and hostility to perceived
welfare scrounging by counter-cultural elements. The rise of a Christian Right should be touched
upon. The cultural civil war might be seen as becoming particularly intense when it comes to
certain issues such as the conflict between the police and the Black Power movement, or clashes
with the homosexual community and or protests outside and attacks upon abortion clinics.
Stronger answers will, in the final analysis, explore whether the concept of a ‘civil war’ is helpful.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
Counter-Culture, Reaganism and the New Right and the notion of a civil war itself. Candidates
should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the
relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where
appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of
differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Students should perhaps be aware of
the various forms of bias that colour much of the writing around this subject. Stronger answers
will avoid the temptation to pass judgement on the various struggles but focus instead on how
useful the concept of a civil war is. It might be contended for example that American social history
in this era is not a two sided struggle: the so-called Counter-Culture was not a coherent
movement, eventually fracturing into myriad special interest groups and that the majority of
Americans were not taking sides as such. In that sense the term ‘civil war’ might be seen as an
exaggeration and a simplification.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 41
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
37 Assess the claim that between 1945 and 2000 the United States resolved its racial tensions
and became an integrated society.
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: it may well be that most
candidates will stress the Civil Rights movement but the question is broader than that and some
reference must be made to the problems posed by immigration and possibly also the position of
Native Americans. Content which focuses on the position of African Americans will need to look
at the main developments in the struggle for Civil Rights, such as Brown versus the Board of
Education, the Little Rock crisis, Kennedy’s intervention and Johnson’s Civil and Voting Rights
Acts. Beyond that there is the volatile era of Black Power and, in the later phase, a much stronger
sense of integration with African Americans reaching positions of authority and individuals such
as Jesse Jackson becoming high profile politicians. Native American legal and political struggles
will need attention as will the continuing anxiety about illegal immigrants. Stronger candidates will
arrive at a conclusion which relates sharply to the precise question and conveys the complexity of
the history.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
integration, assimilation, Americanisation, identity and self determination. Candidates should
present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant
and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at, a well-considered judgement. Where
appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of
differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. There is case for arguing that African
Americans and Native Americans have made progress since the Second World War but some
might argue that this has been at the cost of a sense of solidarity. There is a debate to be had
about what constitutes ‘successful’ integration, given concerns about, for example, preserving
Native American culture. The question of immigration has raised wider concerns about the nature
of American identity.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Page 42
Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version
Pre-U – May/June 2011
Syllabus
9769
Paper
03
38 To what extent have US politics in the twentieth century been shaped by Christian ideas
and organisations?
Candidates should:
AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical
knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: this is a huge question,
with all sorts of legitimate approaches within it; stronger candidates will shape the material
confidently. A chronological approach is acceptable but the stronger candidates will have the
ability to select relevant issues and events. Attention to the rhetoric of US politicians will provide
some evidence. Reagan’s use of the term ‘evil empire’, for example, suggests that he saw the
Cold War in loosely religious terms as a struggle between Christian good and atheistic evil. The
various ‘moral crusades’ of the twentieth century, such as Prohibition and the McCarthyite witchhunt were, in part, inspired religious attitudes. However, some presidents, such as the Roman
Catholic JFK, tried to avoid letting their religion be seen to affect their policies. The politics of
Martin Luther King and the critical role of the Baptist Church is also relevant, as is the rise of the
Christian Right in the 1980s. Stronger answers will display an ability to range widely whilst
keeping the precise question under scrutiny.
AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as
evangelical, protestant and moral crusade. The fact that the question refers to ideas and
organisations should be noted and candidates should show an awareness of both aspects.
Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of
weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered
judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source
material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. It could be argued that
most US presidents have adopted a moral rhetoric and that this, in part, derives from the
influence of Christianity, but alternatively it might be argued that notions of freedom and
democracy, central to much of American political rhetoric, are not necessarily ‘religious’. Indeed,
it might be argued that America’s ideology in the twentieth century was often secular and liberal.
Stronger answers will explore and exploit the various possible ways in which this question can be
interpreted.
AO3 [not applicable to Outlines]
AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of
organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates –
fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and
grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably
influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation.
© University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011
Download